Author Topic: "Lead" and "Toys" are not suppose to go together  (Read 3106 times)

Offline Sassafras

  • MCF Tech | MSG Mod &
  • Administrator
  • *
  • Join Date: Oct 2006
  • Posts: 505
  • A Believer
    • Mackinac Coast Eyewear (aka MisFiTs CenTRaL Eyewear)
"Lead" and "Toys" are not suppose to go together
« on: December 05, 2007, 03:48:58 PM »
Who's idea was it to have a certain amount of lead in toys acceptable?

 :([Looking around the room.]   Anyone?  [Combing the room once more.]  >:(

We really need to know who thought of this hair-brained idea so I and millions of parents in this country
(oh, hell with it - lets include the billions, no, trillions of parents throughout the entire world) can bitch slap this sorry little inbred for walking on the face of the earth and jeopardizing the health of children.

From an article titled Report: 35 percent of toys contain lead, there's information I found that literally scared the bejesus out of me.

Fact:  Lead poisoning can cause irreversible learning disabilities and behavioral problems and, at very high levels, seizures, coma, and even death.

Having known that bit of information, read this:

  • In order for a product to be recalled for lead contamination by federal standards it has to have more than 600 parts per million of lead.
  • The American Academy of Pediatrics recommends a level of 40 ppm of lead as the maximum that should be allowed in children’s products.

I don't get it?  Why should we have lead in children's toys in the first place?  I think someone in the American Academy of Pediatrics should be on the bitch slap list too.  So who's up for it?   >:(

Jeff Gearhart, the campaign director of the Ecology Center feels the same way I do.  In his words:  “Companies can make clean products. Our sampling shows that there’s no reason to put lead in a product.”  You rule Jeff!!

Get this, though:

"Joan Lawrence [one of the people on the bitch slap list], the association’s vice president of standards and safety, said the group, [Toy Industry Association], and its members support limiting accessible lead in children’s products. But she said the industry and standard-setting bodies are struggling with how to measure exposure, accessibility and what limits to set."

Emphasis is mine.

 ??? Ugh?  ??? Um mm...  ??? Well,... how about having NO "accessible lead in children’s products"?  How about NOT "struggling with how to measure exposure, accessibility and what limits to set" by setting and accepting only one acceptable standard - ZERO!!!

Oh, but wait...!  That isn't the only incriminating thing Joan Lawrence has to say.  Read this: 

“ 'The mere presence of any substance along is only half of the answer — you need to know if it’s accessible to the child,' ” Lawrence said. “ 'We can’t tell that from what I know of the tests that have been done by this group.' ”

Ok, then, how did this group conduct it's tests?!?!:

"The center and its testing partners performed what they describe as a “screening” of chemicals using a handheld X-ray fluorescence device that detects surface chemical elements."

 ??? Ugh?  ??? Um mm...  ???  So, what's the problem, Joan?  If this method of "screening" actually does detect "surface chemical elements", then aren't these "surface chemical elements" "accessible to the child"?  Won't these "surface chemical elements" potentially cause "irreversible learning disabilities and behavioral problems and, at very high levels, seizures, coma, and even death"?  Well,... (just to be fair) How does "your" organization, Toy Industry Association, test for lead and other harmful chemicals (there are 9 chemicals to test for, BTW)?:

Jane says, "...The two most common ways are to use solutions to simulate saliva and digestion, and another to attempt to dissolve the surface coating."

Really?  So, if there IS lead in a toy, you and your company doesn't care?  Just so the test finds that the "simulate saliva and digestion" and "attempt to dissolve the surface coating" doesn't exceed 600 ppm (that is 600 parts per million) of lead, it's ok.  Did I get that right?

Again I say, "Why have lead in our children's toys in the first place?"  It's like listening to the politicians discuss whether waterboarding is an acceptable means of torture.  Of course it isn't!!! >:(

And neither is lead in toys!!! >:(

One more thing:

"[Scott Wolfson] said the [U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission] has been meeting with ASTM International, which spearheads voluntary safety standards for toys, to discuss crafting standards specific to lead in plastics. He said there also is movement on Capitol Hill to revise laws on lead in children’s products."

Emphasis is mine.

 >:( Don't make me put you on the bitch slap list too, Scott Wolfson!!!  Because I'll do it!!!  Don't play the political arena with our children!!!

Get the lead out of the toys!!! >:(


Sass
[Steps down from soapbox.]
« Last Edit: December 05, 2007, 03:58:32 PM by Sassafras »


It is not for him to pride himself who loveth his own country, but rather for him who loveth the whole world. The earth is but one country, and mankind its citizens. ~~Baha'u'llah

The chief idols in the desecrated temple of mankind are none other than the triple gods of Nationalism, Racialism and Communism, at whose altars governments and peoples, whether democratic or totalitarian, at peace or at war, of the East or of the West, Christian or Islamic, are, in various forms and in different degrees, now worshiping. ~~Shoghi Effendi, The Promised Day is Come

Offline User Name

  • MisFiT for Life!!!
  • *
  • Join Date: Apr 2008
  • Posts: 60
  • truly "misfit"
    • www.skool.us
Re: "Lead" and "Toys" are not suppose to go together
« Reply #1 on: April 15, 2008, 11:40:59 AM »
I get angry just at the thought that some suit in an office somewhere is "determining" what is best for me without even really being qualified to do so.


 

sir-individual